Is it really Islam's teachings that make Musllims violent?

[DrZoidberg]

I think it's beyond question that Islamic terrorism really is a thing and it's a problem? My question is:

Is Islam really more violent than other religions and is it really the philosophy/theology of Islam that is the problem?


I've read the Koran (and the Bible). I think the Koran and the Bible are interchangeable. If the Koran manages to make Muslims violent, then surely the Bible should make Christians just as violent? Baghavad Ghita has got even more war in it. It's partly pro-war propaganda IMHO. Why aren't Hindus murdering fashion designers who print the face of gods on sandals?

Here's the case I'm making; it's not the teachings of Islam that is the problem, it's the economic and political situation of the people who live in "the Muslim world". If religions would switch around between continents I'm convinced whatever religion they had in the Middle-East would be the problem child. Whatever it says in those religious texts, they would have been picked apart and twisted to justify suicide bombing. Case in point. First recorded use of a worn suicide bomb was by Christians (fighting Muslims) in Gozo 1551.

If you disagree and you think that it is the content of the Koran that is the problem, why?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I think it's beyond question that terrorism in the name of Islam is more violent than any other type of religious terrorism.

Study the past. Christian terrorism in early modern Europe (1514 to 1647) can arguably be considered more violent. Currently most Islamic people are seeing great changes in their society (from where they knew their place from cradle to grave) and it's structures and are using a memory of a golden age that never was as their guide.

There are 1 Billion Muslims, how come it is only a small number that are causing all the strife. Shouldn't it be the wide swath of Muslims if it is their religion alone causing the rcukus?

 

[Togo]

I think it's beyond question that terrorism in the name of Islam is more violent than any other type of religious terrorism.

It's going to be very hard to get past this initial assumption to anything useful.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think it's beyond question that terrorism in the name of Islam is more violent than any other type of religious terrorism.

Study the past. Christian terrorism in early modern Europe (1514 to 1647) can arguably be considered more violent. Currently most Islamic people are seeing great changes in their society (from where they knew their place from cradle to grave) and it's structures and are using a memory of a golden age that never was as their guide.

There are 1 Billion Muslims, how come it is only a small number that are causing all the strife. Shouldn't it be the wide swath of Muslims if it is their religion alone causing the rcukus?

That's exactly my position as well.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think it's beyond question that terrorism in the name of Islam is more violent than any other type of religious terrorism.

It's going to be very hard to get past this initial assumption to anything useful.

Good point. I changed the question formulation. I agree. I'm not so sure my assumption really is true. So I removed it.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I think it is both. I dont believe that the religion alone creates terrorism. You need the history, power imbalance, etc. But it sure would help if the Quran wasnt so easily read as a primer for hatred and violence, and it also sure would help if the Quran had some friendlier bits like the sermon on the mount. Jesus was a rabble rouser but Mohammed was a warlord. They are orders of magnitude different.

 

[barbos]

It's all of the above.
Having said that, Mohamed himself used religion for terrorism and getting political power, so what they do today is not that far off from what he was doing.
Other religions have a lot of violence and crap in their books but their prophets are much more vague and fairy taily.
This guy was fucking "Hitler" of that era. Hitler who actually won.

 

[NobleSavage]

There are plenty of Christians who ignore the bible and or put their own spin on it. I'm sure it's the same with Muslims.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think it is both. I dont believe that the religion alone creates terrorism. You need the history, power imbalance, etc. But it sure would help if the Quran wasnt so easily read as a primer for hatred and violence, and it also sure would help if the Quran had some friendlier bits like the sermon on the mount. Jesus was a rabble rouser but Mohammed was a warlord. They are orders of magnitude different.

The Koran goes on and on about the importance to forgive instead of taking revenge. I think the only Sura that really goes overboard is the bit about killing is the only on Arab peninsula Pagans. But that's a demographic that is since long wiped out.

I'm not really in a good spot here to search. But I remember reading the bit about adultery. Both parties should be stoned to death unless they repent, apologise and promise not to do it again, in which case they're let off free with zero punishment. The Sharia interprets this as = death always. Which is the exact opposite of what the text actually reads.

Both the Koran and the Bible is very explicit on the fact that humans shouldn't pass judgement on other humans. This is for God to do. Which effectively should put all terrorists out of business. Also, Jihad is mainly about building communal public works. Not war. There's so much in the Koran that is simply ignored by violent Muslims.

 

[barbos]

I think it is both. I dont believe that the religion alone creates terrorism. You need the history, power imbalance, etc. But it sure would help if the Quran wasnt so easily read as a primer for hatred and violence, and it also sure would help if the Quran had some friendlier bits like the sermon on the mount. Jesus was a rabble rouser but Mohammed was a warlord. They are orders of magnitude different.

The Koran goes on and on about the importance to forgive instead of taking revenge.

You forget that it only applies to fellow Muslims.

 

[untermensche]

Islamic leaders can drive followers to violence.

Just as US leaders drive it's mercenary army to violence.

Young humans are easily driven to violence by so-called leaders. It is a problem with the species, not any religion.

But mainly Islamic leaders are driving young followers to violence for political ends, not religious.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

HISTORY OF COLONIZATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA

 

[barbos]

I think it's beyond question that terrorism in the name of Islam is more violent than any other type of religious terrorism.

Study the past. Christian terrorism in early modern Europe (1514 to 1647) can arguably be considered more violent. Currently most Islamic people are seeing great changes in their society (from where they knew their place from cradle to grave) and it's structures and are using a memory of a golden age that never was as their guide.

We are not in the past anymore, we are in present.
Christianity was surely violent by today's standard, not so much by the standards of that era.

There are 1 Billion Muslims, how come it is only a small number that are causing all the strife. Shouldn't it be the wide swath of Muslims if it is their religion alone causing the rcukus?

Define small number? And is it really small numbers if we limit ourselves to places like Saudi Arabia?

 

[untermensche]

Christianity was surely violent by today's standard, not so much by the standards of that era.

Compared to the violence carried out by the US, Muslim violence today is miniscule.

They are not dropping bombs from planes, killing with drones, overrunning with tanks, or shooting projectiles made from depleted uranium.

 

[Medicine Man]

I think it's beyond question that Islamic terrorism really is a thing and it's a problem? My question is:

Is Islam really more violent than other religions and is it really the philosophy/theology of Islam that is the problem?

I guess it's always possible they started hanging-out....​

...With The Wrong Crowd!!​

*​

I've read the Koran (and the Bible). I think the Koran and the Bible are interchangeable.​

....Moreso than a LOT o' "Christians" would....​

....Like To Admit​

​

 

[Rhea]

There have been some studies showing a very strong correlation between the percent of the population that is young, male and jobless with more frequent and more vicious violence. That may partly explain why the different phases in history show problems from different areas.

 

[repoman]

Thanks DrZoidberg to getting to the heart of the two other current threads. IMO, the Quran and Hadith themselves are violent but the Geopolitics has intensified this violence. There have been times where Islam has been relatively peaceful with neighbors and times where it has been a conquering force. I can't pretend to understand why.

However, the point that is being ignored is the lack of integration of Muslim immigrants in Europe and how that is leading to radicalization. How much of it is from Europeans not liking muslims and how much from Muslims being too serious about Islam for a modern society?

The other question is how much immigration is actually happening and how long can it maintain the current pace until there are massive and intractable Muslim enclaves demanding and getting autonomy with Sharia? They won't need to be terrorists to get their demands met. The irony is that they will use the Western liberal concepts of autonomy to get Sharia and then inflict rigid and heinous rules on their own people.

The other difference about Islamic immigrants (ignoring the Sunni/Shia split) is that no matter which country they come from they will come together. Vietnamese and Filipino immigrants would not come together in this way.

I will come right out and say that I think that Islam will act like a Fifth Column in these European countries if immigration continues unchecked. Even though a large majority of Muslims there currently couldn't imagine or desire this to happen. The moderates and casuals will fall in line if the radicals take control.

 

[Medicine Man]

HISTORY OF COLONIZATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA​

Hey....you know what they say.....​

Bu$ine$$ Is Bu$ine$$!!

*

"A variety of small, divided Arab states would be much easier to maneuver into oil deals than a large, independent Arab republic."​

 

[Medicine Man]

There have been some studies showing a very strong correlation between the percent of the population that is young, male and jobless with more frequent and more vicious violence.​

....Which would prompt any logic-driven person to re-designate ISIS an average, ordinary, garden-variety GANG.​

 

[none]

I think it's beyond question that Islamic terrorism really is a thing and it's a problem? My question is:

Is Islam really more violent than other religions and is it really the philosophy/theology of Islam that is the problem?


I've read the Koran (and the Bible). I think the Koran and the Bible are interchangeable. If the Koran manages to make Muslims violent, then surely the Bible should make Christians just as violent? Baghavad Ghita has got even more war in it. It's partly pro-war propaganda IMHO. Why aren't Hindus murdering fashion designers who print the face of gods on sandals?

Here's the case I'm making; it's not the teachings of Islam that is the problem, it's the economic and political situation of the people who live in "the Muslim world". If religions would switch around between continents I'm convinced whatever religion they had in the Middle-East would be the problem child. Whatever it says in those religious texts, they would have been picked apart and twisted to justify suicide bombing. Case in point. First recorded use of a worn suicide bomb was by Christians (fighting Muslims) in Gozo 1551.

If you disagree and you think that it is the content of the Koran that is the problem, why?

Muslims believe that Muhammad is the ideal for humanity, violent barbarian pedophile. You put the pieces together, it isn't that difficult.